Legal title and land claims

By Audrius A. Stonkus, Stoney Creek
The Hamilton Spectator(Aug 26, 2006)

Re: 'Six Nations women lay claim to windmills' (Aug. 19)

Aboriginal activist Kahentinetha Horn and a colleague have laid claim to a $27-million wind farm near Shelburne, Etobicoke Board of Education land in Nottawasaga Township, and the Highway 407 toll road. Her hunger for land seems ravenous and insatiable.

Horn does not appear to have any standing as a chief, but rather makes the claim as a woman on behalf of the North American Six Nations population.

Likewise the disputed land at the Caledonia Douglas Creek Estates only represents a small portion of the Haldimand Tract claimed by the natives, which encompasses the communities of Dunnville, Caledonia, Brantford, Paris, Grand Valley and Cambridge, among others. Resolution of the Douglas Creek mess would not necessarily preclude future claims in any or all of these communities.

It would appear no land is secure from claims by any native tribe, native group, native nation or native individual. Legal title is of no consequence.

Indeed, Horn has maintained in some of her writings that since all of Canada has been stolen from the natives, it all must be returned. Canadian law, Canadian law enforcement and Canadian proprietary rights are not recognized. Anthropological and archeological research shows that, contrary to aboriginal creationist mythology, North America's so-called "indigenous" people emigrated from Siberia over an ice bridge (or possibly a land bridge) across the Bering Strait. This research is now substantiated by DNA evidence of the genetic link between the Siberians and North American natives.

Webster's Dictionary defines indigenous as, "originating naturally in a (specified) place or country; native."

So, in fact, the people we call "natives" are neither native nor indigenous, but merely the first immigrants.

We are truly a nation of immigrants. And as immigrants, we should all be entitled to equal treatment under the law rather than privileges bestowed on a first-come, first-served basis as Horn and her colleagues are advocating for themselves.

Certainly no one would argue that Canadians of United Empire Loyalist stock, by virtue of their early arrival, should enjoy privileges not extended to present day first- or second-generation Canadians.

To do so would be blatantly racist and no one wants to be called a racist.